Messsucherkamera Posted December 2, 2011 Share #1 Posted December 2, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Believe it or not, I do not own a digital camera - not one. My photography is 100% silver halide based. I'm wondering if there are any other forum members who also work only in film, paper and chemical based photography - am I the only one? I'm also curious if others who adhere to silver based photography methods encounter comments or subtle prodding to join the digital rat race, or perhaps hear joking comments from their photographic acquaintances and/or peers about their "odd" method of photographing. One of my photographic acquaintances is obsessed with preaching to the world the virtues of HDR digital imaging and what he sees as the vast superiority of digital photography over silver based imaging. When he begins one of his sermons, I humor him (to get it over with as quickly as possible). My mind wanders off to coastal Scotland, where I'd love to photograph one day. It's his world, I'm just passing thru. Yesterday I developed a batch of Tri-X. While agitating the film in the fixer, I thought of how much I'd rather be doing what I was doing than sitting at a keyboard fiddling with digital files in photoshop. I love it when my negs are dry and I get to cut them, put them in 35 7-B archival sheets and look at them on my light table with a photographic loupe. It's a very rewarding process - for me, at least. If you are 100% silver based in your photography, please share your story and experiences on "the silver path." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 Hi Messsucherkamera, Take a look here 100% film based photography. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
NB23 Posted December 2, 2011 Share #2 Posted December 2, 2011 I'm like you. I spend at least 3 nights a week printing my stuff. I despise digital altough I earn a living from it. If I stack all my archival prints I'll have at least 12' high. Each print took me about 30 minutes to make. Only a real connoisseur knows how rewarding this is. Digital photographers, even the so-called experts (the same ones that never even shot film), probably never printed more then 35 inkjetprints in their life. They love to spend their time browsing thru an infinite amount of headache inducing stupid folders. Then they have to sort thousands of photographs. Absolute nightmare! Film, beyond film itself, is a craft. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morry Katz Posted December 2, 2011 Share #3 Posted December 2, 2011 I too work only on film. And I process film and make fibre based prints in a wet darkroom. I have no digital equipment, but I do have 6 film cameras. All are loaded and ready to use. Working in the darkroom is much more enjoyable than fighting a computer program. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mono Posted December 2, 2011 Share #4 Posted December 2, 2011 Me, too! And you should visit Scotland as soon as possible! Perhaps you´ll like it as I do: MonoArt - fine photographs: portfolio II Wish I could be there again ;-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
christer Posted December 2, 2011 Share #5 Posted December 2, 2011 Until last week I only used film cameras. And processed everything through to the final black and white print myself. Last week I got myself a Sony NEX 5n with the 18-55 mm lens. I bought it to use with my Leica M lenses as the crop factor is just 1.5. With the NEX I realized a few things: 1. There is no need to use Photoshop. 2. I'll leave the kit lens on the NEX except for very special shootings because of image stabilization and autofocus. Leica lenses do not produce better images for normal daily shooting and internet usage. Tonight I am going to do some wet printing. For b+w I prefer wet prints, but I have been to a few exhibitions lately where excellent "Epson prints on Hahnemühle paper" were shown. If one does a large number of print runs of ten or more, then such prints have a definite advantage. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joachim123 Posted December 2, 2011 Share #6 Posted December 2, 2011 I shoot only slides. Have for more that 20 years. I have never had the desire to own a digital camera. I dont own not even one. Last week I was shooting the Rememberance Day Parade when a gentleman with a fancy digital camera asked me: Is that a Leica? I replied yes it is. He replied but its film, with a puzzled look on his face. I replied it works fine for me. Just came back from a week in Wyoming and cant wait to get the slides back from the lab. Exciting!!!!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbretteville Posted December 2, 2011 Share #7 Posted December 2, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) I use digital too. For some things it is convenient and quick as when this afternoon my 7-year old had his first Tae Kwon Do promotion. The student and his family want to see pictures the same day, whether they're here in Oslo or in San Diego CA. So I use the GF1 to satisfy the need for speed and an M, the M7 today. There is no room in my life for whet printing so I hybrid out and scan the negs. You can look down on that as much as you like, but it is what works for me. I have the equipment and know how, I used to work in a darkroom to fund my college tuition. Carl Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted December 2, 2011 Share #8 Posted December 2, 2011 I guess I shoot about 80% film. Sometimes digital makes sense! But if I'm taking photos that matter, and speed of results isn't an issue, then I always choose film. I process my own B&W film but sold my darkroom gear years back due to lack of space at the time. I'm seriously thinking of picking up an enlarger and some basic equipment again though....... At the moment I scan and print, which also works for me, although B&W prints just aren't the same. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomB_tx Posted December 2, 2011 Share #9 Posted December 2, 2011 I took a long break from photography as digital took over, since I had no interest in all the automation and burst-mode stuff. Started back with film when I retired, and have been having a ball with it. Still setting up my old darkroom equipment, as I used to do a lot of printing. However, I was of the school that the goal of darkroom manipulation was to learn how to capture the shot better the next time, so that less manipulation was needed. We always thought contact sheets and slide shows were the test of a photographer's "capture" ability. The M9 got me into digital, as I can use it just like a film camera. I approach it like I did with film: that learning the sensor response is like learning a film type, with the goal to create the picture I want at the capture, not in post-processing. As Puts pointed out, the M9 presents a short path from shooting to quality print, with minimal manipulation in Lightroom. But I'm an engineer, not an artist. An image can always be "improved" to create the artist's vision and I appreciate what artists can do in post processing. I like to capture what I see and preserve it, and may not have the imagination to create something different from it. I still enjoy wet darkroom work though. I guess I spent too much of my carreer working on computers and developing software to make that part of my photography. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebarnman Posted December 2, 2011 Share #10 Posted December 2, 2011 Me, too!And you should visit Scotland as soon as possible! Perhaps you´ll like it as I do: MonoArt - fine photographs: portfolio II Wish I could be there again ;-) You stated your choice for medium format was easy...Hasselblad. I keep reading the lens for Mamiya is more like Leica lens. However I do not know if there was another reason you picked Hasselblad. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebarnman Posted December 2, 2011 Share #11 Posted December 2, 2011 Leica lenses do not produce better images for normal daily shooting and internet usage. Why do you say that? Images for daily shooting and internet usage does carry the Leica look to those images...even when it's on the internet. All the images I've had scanned carry over that Leica look. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomasw_ Posted December 2, 2011 Share #12 Posted December 2, 2011 I own an iPhone 4, but other than that I am 100% film. I shoot mostly with my Leica Ms, but I do have a Rollei SL66 which I love using for certain projects. All of my photography is film-based, as I find it has more character and depth of texture than digital, and I tend to spend much of my free time in my darkroom printing and developing. My favourite enlarger to use is my leitz focomat 1c with its focotar-2 50mm enlarging lens. BTW, I am currently building myself a new darkroom --- I am quite excited about 'moving' into it. I have acquired a few new toys for it, too; most recently a film/print drying cabinet So, yes, along with a few others here at LUF, I am firmly dedicated to the BW analog processes! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted December 2, 2011 Share #13 Posted December 2, 2011 Digital photographers, even the so-called experts (the same ones that never even shot film), probably never printed more then 35 inkjetprints in their life. They love to spend their time browsing thru an infinite amount of headache inducing stupid folders. What a load of crap. I speak as a digital photographer who has shot thousands of rolls of film, printed more than 35 inkjet prints, and have never had a headache looking at digital photographs in folders. Try not to tar others with your own prejudices. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NB23 Posted December 2, 2011 Share #14 Posted December 2, 2011 What a load of crap. I speak as a digital photographer who has shot thousands of rolls of film, printed more than 35 inkjet prints, and have never had a headache looking at digital photographs in folders. Try not to tar others with your own prejudices. To me, and to all my photographer friends, the endless files, backups, file names and overall digital management is a load of crap. I stand on this. If you want to dissociate, it's yours to do so. No need to get all nervous about it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted December 2, 2011 Share #15 Posted December 2, 2011 Digital photographers, even the so-called experts (the same ones that never even shot film), probably never printed more then 35 inkjetprints in their life. They love to spend their time browsing thru an infinite amount of headache inducing stupid folders. Then they have to sort thousands of photographs. Absolute nightmare! There's no need to put others down to enjoy using film. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NB23 Posted December 3, 2011 Share #16 Posted December 3, 2011 As a pro in the busIness, I have to cope with a lot of newcomers and so-called experts who indeed have never touched a roll of film nor printed more then a handful of photos. But yet they have a computer filled with millions of files. I don't know how exactly I'm putting them down by calling a cat a cat. One thing is sure, though. The photography profession has been hit extremely hard by these so-called. Lets now get back on topic... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted December 3, 2011 Share #17 Posted December 3, 2011 No need to get all nervous about it. To be honest I thought it was you who came over as insecure with your attack on digital photographers. Personally I have no problem with people preferring film. You obviously feel differently about people who make a different choice to you. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Studio58 Posted December 3, 2011 Share #18 Posted December 3, 2011 One thing is sure, though. The photography profession has been hit extremely hard by these so-called. Having just closed my studio after 12 years I have to agree...... unfortunately. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/167666-100-film-based-photography/?do=findComment&comment=1860762'>More sharing options...
AlanG Posted December 3, 2011 Share #19 Posted December 3, 2011 Digital photographers, even the so-called experts (the same ones that never even shot film), probably never printed more then 35 inkjetprints in their life. They love to spend their time browsing thru an infinite amount of headache inducing stupid folders. Then they have to sort thousands of photographs. Absolute nightmare! Film, beyond film itself, is a craft. A few thousand photographs would be pretty easy to deal with and this has nothing to do with digital or film as many photographers shot lots of film. I shot film for about 35 years. 25 of that commercially so it really added up since I had a lot of assignments and also shot for stock. I had an entire room filled with film in filing cabinets. All formats from 35mm to 8x10 in b/w, color neg and transparencies. I even wrote software for labeling and cross-indexing the images but could never keep up and get it organized. What a nightmare that was. It was only when I started scanning the film and organizing it on a computer that I gained control over it. Let's say you have shot countless jobs and these jobs contain images of thousands of bathrooms and some have marble floors. All of the images are filed by the name of the job with the name of the client, perhaps a brief description, and the date. How would you find those specific images of marble bathroom floors in a film file and how long would it take just to fill one stock request like that? Then when you send those images out for a potential stock sale, do you have additional copies of all of them if they are needed for another stock request or for use again by the original client? How do you keep track of all of the images that are out? What if they get lost or damaged in transport? So now I have the nightmare problem again as my stock agency returned all of my film several years ago. The 35mm slides are bundled in groups of about 20 images held by a rubber band or they are on pages as are the MF and 4x5 transparencies. I periodically get requests from customers who previously published some of these images and want to use them again. How should I deal with this since they comprise tens of thousands of disorganized images in boxes and it could take a very very long time to find specific images? Do you think I have the time or want to pay someone to scan and label all of these? Or should I waste even more time by filing all of these old images that probably have very limited use as film, since customers only want images in digital form. Yes, maybe there are some gems in there somewhere, but mostly nothing "special." Now multiply this situation by at least several thousand photographers. For the record... I have made countless wet prints and I have made countless inkjet prints. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted December 3, 2011 Share #20 Posted December 3, 2011 ...Lets now get back on topic... Yes, let's... this thread is in favor of film, not anti-digital. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.